Shared Decision Making The HoyTarter Simplified Model Hoy

  • Slides: 13
Download presentation
Shared Decision Making: The Hoy-Tarter Simplified Model © Hoy, 2003

Shared Decision Making: The Hoy-Tarter Simplified Model © Hoy, 2003

Question • Should you involve subordinates in the decisionmaking process? Natural systems --human relations

Question • Should you involve subordinates in the decisionmaking process? Natural systems --human relations Answer-“Of Course!” Rational systems-scientific management Answer-Only if they have expertise. Open systems-social science Answer-“It Depends!” © Hoy, 2003

Four Critical Questions • Under what conditions should the leader involve subordinates in decision

Four Critical Questions • Under what conditions should the leader involve subordinates in decision making? • To what extent should subordinates be involved? • How should the decision making group be structured and function? • What is the role of the leader in participative leadership? © Hoy, 2003

Assumptions of the Hoy-Tarter Model • As subordinates are involved in decision making located

Assumptions of the Hoy-Tarter Model • As subordinates are involved in decision making located within their ZONE OF ACCEPTANCE, participation will be less effective. • As subordinates are involved in decision making outside their ZONE OF ACCEPTANCE, participation will be more effective. • As participants are involved in decision making for which they have MARGINAL EXPERTISE, their participation will be marginally effective. • As subordinates are involved in decision making for which they have MARGINAL INTEREST, their participation will be marginally effective. © Hoy, 2003

Zone of Acceptance Do subordinates have a personal stake in the outcome? YES NO

Zone of Acceptance Do subordinates have a personal stake in the outcome? YES NO YES Outside Zone of Acceptance Marginal with Expertise (Definitely include) (Occasionally include) Marginal with Relevance Inside Zone of Acceptance (Occasionally include) (Definitely exclude) Do subordinates have expertise? NO © Hoy, 2003

Another Important Question Can you trust subordinates to make a decision in the best

Another Important Question Can you trust subordinates to make a decision in the best interest of the organization? Thus there are three critical questions: 1. Do subordinates have a personal stake in the outcomes of the decision? 2. [The Relevance Question] 2. Do subordinates have the expertise to make a knowledgeable contribution? [The Expertise Question] 3. Can you trust subordinates to make a decision in the best interest of the organization? [The Trust Question] © Hoy, 2003

Situations for Participative Decision Making Democratic Conflictual Stakeholder Expert Noncollaborative Relevance? Yes Yes No

Situations for Participative Decision Making Democratic Conflictual Stakeholder Expert Noncollaborative Relevance? Yes Yes No No Expertise? Yes No Trust? Yes No Yes/No N/A © Hoy, 2003

Decision Situations: Review • Democratic • Conflictual • Stakeholder • Expert • Noncollaborative ©

Decision Situations: Review • Democratic • Conflictual • Stakeholder • Expert • Noncollaborative © Hoy, 2003

Decision Situations and Degree of Involvement • Democratic--Maximum Involvement. • Conflictual--Limit Involvement (until trust

Decision Situations and Degree of Involvement • Democratic--Maximum Involvement. • Conflictual--Limit Involvement (until trust is developed). • Stakeholder--Occasional Involvement (to educate). • Expert--Occasional Involvement (for better decisions). • Noncollaborative--No Involvement. © Hoy, 2003

Decision-Making Groups and Their Functions Group Consensus Group Majority Group Advisory Individual Advisory Unilateral

Decision-Making Groups and Their Functions Group Consensus Group Majority Group Advisory Individual Advisory Unilateral Who is Involved? Leader and Group Nature of Involvement? Group shares information, analyzes and reaches consensus. Group shares information, deliberates, and votes on action. Who makes the decision? Group by Consensus Group by Leader with Majority Rule Advice © Hoy, 2003 Group shares information, analyzes and recommends. Leader and Selected Individuals Leader Individuals provide data, discuss, and recommend. No subordinate involvement Leader with Advice Leader Alone

Five Leadership Roles 1. The integrator brings subordinates together for consensus decision-making. Here the

Five Leadership Roles 1. The integrator brings subordinates together for consensus decision-making. Here the task is to reconcile divergent opinions and positions. 2. 3. The parliamentarian facilitates open communication by protecting the opinions of the minority and leads through a democratic process to a group decision. 3. 4. The educator reduces resistance to change by explaining and discussing with group members the opportunities and constrains of the decisional issues. 4. 5. The solicitor seeks advice from subordinate-experts. The quality of decisions is improved As the administrator guides the generation of relevant information. 5. 6. The director makes unilateral decisions in those instances where the subordinates have no expertise or personal stake. Here the goal is efficiency. © Hoy, 2003

Administrative Roles for Decision Making Role Function Aim Integrator Brings together divergent positions To

Administrative Roles for Decision Making Role Function Aim Integrator Brings together divergent positions To achieve consensus Parliamentarian Facilitates open discussion To support reflective deliberation Educator Explains and discusses issues To assure acceptance of decisions Solicitor Solicits advice from teachers To improve quality of decisions Director Makes unilateral decisions To attain efficiency © Hoy, 2003

A Normative Model for Participative Decision Making Relevance YES NO YES Outside Zone Marginal

A Normative Model for Participative Decision Making Relevance YES NO YES Outside Zone Marginal with Expertise NO Marginal with Relevance Inside Zone Expertise Trust YES 1. Situation? NO Democratic 2. Involvement? Conflictual Stakeholder Yes but limited Occasionally and limited Group Majority Group Advisory Individual Advisory Unilateral Parliamentarian Educator Solicitor Director Yes and extensive 3. Decision. Making Structures Group Consensus 4. Role of Superior? Integrator © Hoy, 2003 Expert Occasionally and limited Noncollaborative None

Shared Decision Making Shared Decision Making MAGIC MakingShared Decision Making Shared Decision Making MAGIC Making
DECISION MAKING DECISION MAKING Decision Making is concernedDECISION MAKING DECISION MAKING Decision Making is concerned
Decision Making DECISION MAKING Decision making is theDecision Making DECISION MAKING Decision making is the
DECISION MAKING Decision Making Decision Making a choiceDECISION MAKING Decision Making Decision Making a choice
DECISION MAKING AND ORGANIZING DECISION MAKING Decision makingDECISION MAKING AND ORGANIZING DECISION MAKING Decision making
DECISION MAKING MODEL pg 42 Decision Making ModelDECISION MAKING MODEL pg 42 Decision Making Model
Rational Decision Making SSEF 2 Decision Making DecisionRational Decision Making SSEF 2 Decision Making Decision
Decision Making DECISION MAKING A decision is aDecision Making DECISION MAKING A decision is a
Decision Making Spring 2007 Decision Making 1 DecisionDecision Making Spring 2007 Decision Making 1 Decision
Decision Making An Introduction 1 Decision Making DecisionDecision Making An Introduction 1 Decision Making Decision
Decision Making Decision Making The process of makingDecision Making Decision Making The process of making
The Decision Counseling Program and Shared Decision MakingThe Decision Counseling Program and Shared Decision Making